Your honour, the defendant Mr. Integrated Circuit has engaged in an extremely long, insidious campaign of technological progress designed specifically to undermine our business model. This latest misuse of our birthday song is only the recent end of a consistent pattern of abuse of our interests and rights as culture owners blah blah yackety schmackety.
I would not bother mentioning my Web presence on my resume except for positive achievements I might wish to point out.
If questioned in the interview, my answer will simply be "If you look me up on the Internet you'll probably find evidence of whatever drinking and drugging goes on in my personal time. If you want to know about my ability to keep that stuff from affecting my professional life, please feel free to ask my previous employers."
I see no reason to continue the interview if they press the issue beyond that.
You, and about 30 other people, have made this point. "Anything launched from the Earth will have a huge orbital velocity to lose, which is way expensive!"
Has nobody considered that OTHER meaning of "slingshot" in the context of orbital dynamics?
It's not like the payload has to leave Earth, put on the brakes, and then fall straight into the Sun's gravity well. We can just launch a rocket for a close-call with Mars.
The Copyright Cartel knows that the technology to thwart them already exists, and that they'll never get that toothpaste back into the tube.
Their big fight now is to keep that technology from appearing friendly and safe to the general public. If they can make it look to Joe Average like there's a Copyright War going on, and he might get hurt, then they can bully the general public into another few years' compliance before the technical know-how becomes ubiquitous.
Then that customer has broken the law and you haven't. It's no different from the bank-robbery getaway car and the auto dealer, or the counterfeiter and the printing-press manufacturer.
"A person is guilty of theft, if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it". (Section 1)
What's you're "permanently depriving the other of" is the rights-holder's ability to sell you a copy of the work. Whether that ability was worthless or not depends on whether you'd have bought it if it wasn't available for free.
The Content Industry may actually be succeeding in their approach, at least temporarily.
That's all they need. I think everyone with any real understanding of the technology and how it's developing realizes that the old industries' days are numbered. Now it's just a matter of legislating themselves another 5 or 15 more years of livelihood before they retire.
Hang on; if you had a piece of fairy cake, then couldn't you just use that matter to extrapolate information about hadron collisions elsewhere in space?
This seems to be a big pattern with the telcos; We watch them rigging up the networks with absolutely state-of-the-art core routing gear capable of extremely invasive and insidious layer-7 tricks (breaking the end-to-end principle in the process) and so forth.
But whenever a technological advance would be good for customers and not for the shareholders, we hear "But our network just won't handle that kind of load! But our billing system isn't designed that way! But we have no way of distinguishing that third-party VoIP traffic from things like p2p! Our hands are tied here!"
I just don't buy it. They solve far bigger engineering problems than this on an ongoing basis, when the company has an incentive to do so.
Your own limited experience with phone providers is grounds to call me a liar, with no further information?
really?
It was Rogers Wireless, and they told me about 5 years ago that they could not rig up an auto-disconnect to prevent me from ringing up bills beyond any particular amount. The best they could do is offer to give me a courtesy call (within 1 business day, which would not have saved this kid) if I went over.
I am sorry to be the one to tell you this, but you are full of shit. Phone providers go to every length they are legally able to ensure that as many of these "misunderstandings" happen as possible.
The "But the billing information doesn't even find its way home until days later!" line is bullshit. When they have a financial incentive to do so, they can get an IP packet from one continent to another in milliseconds. What technical limitation prevents them from accomplishing this same feat in order to increase transparency? And if you say "time zones / business hours" I will rape your mouth. My provider is quite happy to take a phone call from me at 4:00AM because I want to give them money.
Slashdot Mirror
And here we get to a fundamental question about what we want the Net to be. The court was entirely right to balk at deciding this for us.
We can have the right to communicate anonymously over the Net. Or we can have the right not to be contacted by anonymous people. We can't have both.
what, you mean like a Walkman?
</conchord>
Your honour, the defendant Mr. Integrated Circuit has engaged in an extremely long, insidious campaign of technological progress designed specifically to undermine our business model. This latest misuse of our birthday song is only the recent end of a consistent pattern of abuse of our interests and rights as culture owners blah blah yackety schmackety.
correlation != coincidence as well.
Other coincidences abound, such as the fact that human flight became viable around the same time as the advent of the aeroplane.
Each is a proposed name for a strategy to solve Microsoft's crappy-OS reputation problems.
Hardy Heron names an altogether different strategy...
If you'd delivered this argument in person I would clap.
That noise you just heard was the entire /. userbase reading your comment and shooting themselves in unison.
You have it exactly right.
I would not bother mentioning my Web presence on my resume except for positive achievements I might wish to point out.
If questioned in the interview, my answer will simply be "If you look me up on the Internet you'll probably find evidence of whatever drinking and drugging goes on in my personal time. If you want to know about my ability to keep that stuff from affecting my professional life, please feel free to ask my previous employers."
I see no reason to continue the interview if they press the issue beyond that.
I see what you did there. Very clever. How is that working out for you? ...Dr. Phil?! Is that you?
OK, Smartguy. Please explain the difference in logical content between these three conversations:
"Nobody voted for Nader."
"I did."
"There was no demand for this product."
"I bought one."
"P is an empty set."
"I am a member of P."
You are a fucking moron if you think your comment is an intelligent reply to the above.
Go outside.
You don't have to kill all that momentum using rockets though. You can transfer it to other planetary bodies instead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_assist
You, and about 30 other people, have made this point. "Anything launched from the Earth will have a huge orbital velocity to lose, which is way expensive!"
Has nobody considered that OTHER meaning of "slingshot" in the context of orbital dynamics?
It's not like the payload has to leave Earth, put on the brakes, and then fall straight into the Sun's gravity well. We can just launch a rocket for a close-call with Mars.
The Copyright Cartel knows that the technology to thwart them already exists, and that they'll never get that toothpaste back into the tube.
Their big fight now is to keep that technology from appearing friendly and safe to the general public. If they can make it look to Joe Average like there's a Copyright War going on, and he might get hurt, then they can bully the general public into another few years' compliance before the technical know-how becomes ubiquitous.
Then that customer has broken the law and you haven't. It's no different from the bank-robbery getaway car and the auto dealer, or the counterfeiter and the printing-press manufacturer.
And if only it were massive enough to materially affect the trajectories of the planetary bodies near it!
"A person is guilty of theft, if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it". (Section 1)
What's you're "permanently depriving the other of" is the rights-holder's ability to sell you a copy of the work. Whether that ability was worthless or not depends on whether you'd have bought it if it wasn't available for free.
The Content Industry may actually be succeeding in their approach, at least temporarily.
That's all they need. I think everyone with any real understanding of the technology and how it's developing realizes that the old industries' days are numbered. Now it's just a matter of legislating themselves another 5 or 15 more years of livelihood before they retire.
there's an inbuilt assumption that copying & distribution is expensive, and therefore nobody would do it for free.
I think you just summed up the MAFIAA's entire problem.
Sharing copyrighted music in Canada is still illegal, but interestingly, downloading and burning copyrighted material for your own use is not.
OH MY GOD i am so insignificant :(((
For those who didn't get it:
http://www.somethingawful.com/flash/shmorky/babby.swf
http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/How_is_babby_formed%3F
Hang on; if you had a piece of fairy cake, then couldn't you just use that matter to extrapolate information about hadron collisions elsewhere in space?
This seems to be a big pattern with the telcos; We watch them rigging up the networks with absolutely state-of-the-art core routing gear capable of extremely invasive and insidious layer-7 tricks (breaking the end-to-end principle in the process) and so forth.
But whenever a technological advance would be good for customers and not for the shareholders, we hear "But our network just won't handle that kind of load! But our billing system isn't designed that way! But we have no way of distinguishing that third-party VoIP traffic from things like p2p! Our hands are tied here!"
I just don't buy it. They solve far bigger engineering problems than this on an ongoing basis, when the company has an incentive to do so.
Your own limited experience with phone providers is grounds to call me a liar, with no further information?
really?
It was Rogers Wireless, and they told me about 5 years ago that they could not rig up an auto-disconnect to prevent me from ringing up bills beyond any particular amount. The best they could do is offer to give me a courtesy call (within 1 business day, which would not have saved this kid) if I went over.
I am sorry to be the one to tell you this, but you are full of shit. Phone providers go to every length they are legally able to ensure that as many of these "misunderstandings" happen as possible.
The "But the billing information doesn't even find its way home until days later!" line is bullshit. When they have a financial incentive to do so, they can get an IP packet from one continent to another in milliseconds. What technical limitation prevents them from accomplishing this same feat in order to increase transparency? And if you say "time zones / business hours" I will rape your mouth. My provider is quite happy to take a phone call from me at 4:00AM because I want to give them money.
Why? This isn't a phone, it's a mobile internet access device for a laptop. There is no phone to call.
They could pull an HTTP redirect and send you to a portal page before they start pumping the kilobits and billing for them.
If they really wanted to.